A catalogue of broken Tory promises – is this the worst UK government ever?

First topic message reminder :

When Labour came to power in 1997, their manifesto contained 229 promises. A BBC analysis five years later found that 181 of the promises, 80%, had been kept. As to the remaining 48 promises, the BBC decided that they were “either too difficult to judge or have not been met.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1961522.stm

Those people who make negative remarks such as “all politicians and parties are the same” would do well to compare Labour’s record on keeping promises with that of the Tories in the past two years. Dr Eoin Clarke has analysed the 2010 Tory manifesto and exposed some of its biggest lies:-

- The Tories said they would offer personalised tailored help to the long term unemployed (p.15), but they hid their plans to force disabled young people and others to work, unpaid, for profit-making companies like Tesco.

- The Tories said they would create 400,000 work-pairing college-based apprenticeship schemes over two years (p.17), but there are fewer than 10,000 apprenticeship places UK-wide.

- The Tories promised to reduce youth unemployment (p.5), but it has risen to an all-time high.

- The Tories said they'd cut child benefit for families earning more than £50,000, but they actually cut it for families where one person earns £44,000.

- The Tories said they'd raise the state pension age to 66, but then raised it to 67.

- The Tories promised to protect Child Trust Funds for the 33% poorest children, but instead axed them for all children.

- The Tories said they would give power to the Bank of England to crack down on bonuses (p.29), but nothing was done and bank bonuses have topped £6 billion in the past year.

- The Tories said they would protect the Winter Fuel Payment to pensioners (p.42), then cut it by £50 for some and £100 for others.

- The Tories said they would provide 4,200 extra Sure Start personnel (p.43). Instead they have cut £812 million in funding, which has resulted in the closing of more than 300 Sure Start Centres.

- The Tories claimed they would reduce unemployment and improve economic growth (p.3), but the opposite has occurred.

- The Tories concealed their plans to cut the Education Maintenance Allowance and raise VAT to 20%. They were also deliberately vague on their support for trebling tuition fees.

- The Tories promised to protect funding for Disability Living Allowance (p.42), which Cameron claimed for his own son, but then cut it for children receiving chemotherapy after they came to power. Now they’ve scrapped it altogether.

http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.com/2011/12/exposing-10-biggest-lies-in-tory.html

For more on the on the human cost of Tory disability cuts:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/may/16/human-cost-disability-cuts?newsfeed=true

Other broken promises have been listed by 'Twitter' member @GracieSamuels:-

No cuts to public spending in 2010-11 (just 'efficiency savings').

No bonuses over £2,000 for bankers.

3,000 more police officers.

Keeping the Future Jobs Fund.

Pupil Premium to be additional to the schools budget.

‘Bonfire of the quangos’ (4,500 more bureaucrats have been recruited).

A Post Office Bank.

No cuts to the navy.

Three more army battalions.

Reduce immigration (it’s risen by 21% in one year).

Automatic prison sentence for carrying a knife.

Cutting rail fares each year.

NHS budget to be protected.

No cuts to frontline services.

3,000 more midwives.

No A&E and maternity unit closures.

And of course, the worst and most disgusting broken Tory promise, hidden from the voters but planned for years and rewarded by private healthcare firms:-

No top-down reorganisation of the NHS.

Is this the worst UK government ever? Have you ever read about or lived through two years of more malevolence towards the weakest in society, and more lies from a Prime Minister so mired in sleaze and corruption?

...." all you need to know about the sycophants who are prepared to follow them no matter what..."

The deference used to be built in, though perhaps less so nowadays. We were taught to show respect to our "elders and betters" regardless of whether they deserved it. In conversation with a Solicitor recently, a highly intelligent and well-educated man, worthy of my respect, he surprised me in the way he spoke of the owner of a piece of land nearby: "Debora, Duchess of Devonshire" in the tone of hushed reverence you might adopt in the Sistine Chapel.

The esteemed lady owes her position entirely to an accident of birth, but a surprising number of people will do exactly what she expects of them, and Good Luck to her for that.

OW said: The esteemed lady owes her position entirely to an accident of birth, but a surprising number of people will do exactly what she expects of them, and Good Luck to her for that.

That just made me think OW.. How many of our ruling elite including Herr Cameron and Buffoon Boris are the descendants of illegitimacy. I for one would love to know just how many Fitz’s they have in their cupboards. Is this what is actually meant by the term “accident of Birth”.

We know that Cameron is descended from one of the ten illegitimate children that William IV (1830-1837) had with an Irish actress. That makes him Mrs Windsor's fifth cousin, twice removed. Can't someone remove him a little further, preferably out of Downing Street and into Wandsworth Prison, where the corrupt git belongs?

Ivan wrote:We know that Cameron is descended from one of the ten illegitimate children that William IV (1830-1837) had with an Irish actress. That makes him Mrs Windsor's fifth cousin, twice removed. Can't someone remove him a little further, preferably out of Downing Street and into Wandsworth Prison, where the corrupt git belongs?

Hi Ivan

Wandsworth prison is a bit too good for him, how about Broadmoor that is for the Criminally Insane which is more suitable for him and his cohorts of a cabinet.

I'm no supporter of smarmy gits like Cameron, but I don't think it's accurate to describe him as corrupt. People born with a silver spoon etc. are destined to succeed - it's as simple as that. He was an obvious choice for a pretty face to front the distinctly unattractive Tory Party, because he hadn't had time to establish their usual rapacious "form".

Now he's older, sadder and wiser the question must be how long will it be before he throws in the towel?

" ....smarmy gits like Cameron, but I don't think it's accurate to describe him as corrupt."

Not sure that view would get universal agreement hereabouts - and, in any event, this is no time for inconvenient concepts like accuracy to put in an appearance...

Quite so, Phil. No need to get the servants agitated. Have a wonderful day and if anyone tries to impinge on your fun, simply make the ‘chop chop’ sign and shout ‘A bas les aristos!’

Certainly make a change from ogleing topless pix.

Hello bobby,
I understand your anger and frustration at the saffron blue liar.
All of those in cabinet have tunnel vision. First and foremost they look after themselves and their own wealthy associates, feathering their nests for the future jobs on the plate. Second they come from backgrounds of being raised with silver spoons, never knowing what any kind of hardship feels like.
The most important thing in their lives is money which they think will keep them healthy and for most of the time that is true.
With this enbedded attitude, where is there any room for care or compassion for those who they bleed to death and live off the poor buggers backs?
Glegg, Gideon, Cameron and Co are all "in it together" and sod the rest.

bobby wrote:Now the coward Clegg has openly appologised for his broken prommises. What a effing cheek.
So now its OK to mess with peoples lives, hopes and aspirations, so long as you say sorry afterwards, If I where to make a promise to someone, that would alter the shape of their lives for the worst, I would without doubt end up in a Court to answer charges, How comes these Bastard politicians seem to think they can lie, cheat and steal, then by saying “sorry” we should accept the apology and forgive them, allowing them to lie, cheat and steal some more.
The very fact he has admitted he didn’t stand by his Pledge pre Election and has apologised tells me the git isn’t fit to lick the boots to those he cheated out of a future they worked hard for.
I bet the shit will make some sort of speech at the Lib-Dem Conference, then no more of the matter will we hear from his lieing gob, and he will continue just as before, crawling up Herr Cameron’s arsehole in the hope of keeping his well paid job a bit longer.
If any of us went out and committed a crime, then said sorry, we would get banged up, but for these low life pond slime it seems that their apology is genuine and ours are not.
Just how can the cnuts go in front of a TV camera watched by the nation whilst lieing through their back teeth, or is it that they actually believe what they say to be the truth, which IMO is far worse and dangerous.

Hi bobby

The only reason he is saying sorry is to placate the L/D activists for his up coming L/D conference, he knows his leadership is on the line and if he looses that he may also have too forfeit his Deputy PM job. Also his rating in the polls is starting to worry him with the G.E looming even closer and does not want the blame for the ANNIHILATION of the L/D party to be on his head, at last he has realized what his jumping into bed with the Tories has done and the nearer the G.E comes the more he will suffer from bad case of DIARRHOEA.

Here's an interest blog, detailing the omnishambles of this appalling government:-

http://haywoodscampaigner.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/114-reasons-not-to-vote-coalition-at.html?spref=tw

Ivan wrote:Here's an interest blog, detailing the omnishambles of this appalling government:-

http://haywoodscampaigner.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/114-reasons-not-to-vote-coalition-at.html?spref=tw

I knew things where bad Ivan but when you see it altogether it scares the SHYT out of you, did you know that omnishambles has made it into the Oxford dictionary ??

Does anybody recall those good old days when we thought there could never ever be anything more apalling than the John Major government?

oftenwrong wrote:I'm no supporter of smarmy gits like Cameron, but I don't think it's accurate to describe him as corrupt. People born with a silver spoon etc. are destined to succeed - it's as simple as that. He was an obvious choice for a pretty face to front the distinctly unattractive Tory Party, because he hadn't had time to establish their usual rapacious "form".

Now he's older, sadder and wiser the question must be how long will it be before he throws in the towel?

I think OW you need to read the Daily Mirror from yesterday and today 21st/22nd and have a good read then come back and tell me Scam..er..on is not corrupt along with is bestest pal Giddy Gideon.

There is a problem which Dave is only the most recent to encounter, about reaching the top.

Once you get there, the only way is DOWN. He really has very little choice now but to stick to the script.

oftenwrong wrote:There is a problem which Dave is only the most recent to encounter, about reaching the top.

Once you get there, the only way is DOWN. He really has very little choice now but to stick to the script.

Just let us hope that his way down its not a very pleasant experience, in fact I hope it is really fcuking nasty he has got other choices OW, but because of his Ideology that is the only reason he will not change and he would not be able to keep his friends (old school tie) and Tory donors happy.

oftenwrong wrote:There is a problem which Dave is only the most recent to encounter, about reaching the top.

Once you get there, the only way is DOWN. He really has very little choice now but to stick to the script.

The thing is OW, they have a hell of a long way to go before reaching the bottom, anyway their wealth will prevent them from getting anywhere near the lower ranks in Society.

bobby wrote:oftenwrong wrote:There is a problem which Dave is only the most recent to encounter, about reaching the top.

Once you get there, the only way is DOWN. He really has very little choice now but to stick to the script.

The thing is OW, they have a hell of a long way to go before reaching the bottom, anyway their wealth will prevent them from getting anywhere near the lower ranks in Society.

Maybe your right about there wealth bobby helping them to grin and bare it on the way down, but to have there name mixed up with being the worst gov't ever and having people treat them the way the bankers where castigated that will hurt more than losing there money.

Weird world when anti-tories are quite happy to bend their knee to Toynbee (multi millionairess) and trust her point of view over all else?

tlttf wrote:Weird world when anti-tories are quite happy to bend their knee to Toynbee (multi millionairess) and trust her point of view over all else?

Toynbee is not getting richer of the backs of the workers tittf, unlike the Tory MPs Scam..er..on was supposed to have cleaned up the expenses and what do we see the MPs (all parties) are still abusing the system, which means that Scam..er..on is fixing it so Tory MPs can buy another house that they do not need. (See Daily Mirror 21st&22nd Nov.)

Strange point of view Red, you accept all the mp's are crooked but if they're tories they're more crooked than the rest. Does that make them cleverer than their counterparts and if so shouldn't you be voting for them?

tlttf wrote:Strange point of view Red, you accept all the mp's are crooked but if they're tories they're more crooked than the rest. Does that make them cleverer than their counterparts and if so shouldn't you be voting for them?

I would hack both hands off myself without anesthetic before I would vote Tory, just like them they care for "NO ONE" but themselves and do not forget the friends in the City and too FCUK with every body else, so why in Gods name would I vote Tory. I notice that the top people at the banks are not suffering wage cuts or bonus cuts for that matter, the ones that helped to bring this country to its knees, maybe instead of taking there bonuses they should be handing it to the treasury so that we can pay down the deficit along with some of there HUGE salaries that way the entire UK would know they regret what they did in 2008.

It gets worse. The Coalition is about to scrap the classic Laws controlling doorstep-sellers.

Capitalism red in tooth and claw. Be prepared for more stories about the elderly being conned out of their life savings.

oftenwrong wrote:It gets worse. The Coalition is about to scrap the classic Laws controlling doorstep-sellers.

Capitalism red in tooth and claw. Be prepared for more stories about the elderly being conned out of their life savings.

Thanks OW it is no different from allowing the legal "Loan Sharks" Wonga and there like, I am reading a book at the moment about the history of the UK it tells about the FCUKING Tories in 1819/21 that is far as I have got as I am FUMING when I read about the "PETERLOO MASSACRE, thanks to the bloody Tories and now there at again putting everyone out of work while they and there rich b(w)anker friends get richer off the backs of the real workers.

2012: A year of lying shamelessly

(Adapted from an article by Cathy Newman for the Channel 4 Fact Check)

In January we were told that the London-to-Birmingham section High Speed 2 rail network would finally go ahead and would cost £32.7 billion, according to the then Transport Secretary Justine Greening. But the Department for Transport published a document on the same day saying the cost would be £3.7 billion more.

Boris Johnson claims to have boosted the numbers of policemen in London. He promised that officer numbers would remain constant in his second term, but he’s failed to keep his word. Nationally, police numbers were being cut too. Was it only really a 6% cut, as Theresa May suggested? Were police forces really managing to handle the cuts without cutting frontline staff? Was it true, as Cameron said, that the number of neighbourhood officers has soared? No, no, and no.

We had our doubts from the start about the Work Programme – the Tory plan to get people off benefits and back to work. In October, leaked figures suggested that A4E, one of the companies commissioned, was failing to hit its minimum targets. This provoked A4E’s founder Emma Harrison into saying that our numbers were wrong and misleading. Unfortunately for everyone, they weren’t. The first official figures out showed that every private sector provider had failed to hit the minimum targets specified by the government.

In October, Cameron said new private sector jobs since the election had hit the one million mark. But only if you start counting before the actual date of the election, and only if you include nearly 200,000 further education workers who were suddenly counted as private sector. Cameron also said a quarter of a million more women were in work than at the time of the election. But he was 60,000 out, and failed to mention that female unemployment was also going up.

The UK Statistics Authority told ministers to stop saying that the NHS budget has gone up in real terms. We first pointed out the weakness of this much repeated claim in July. The government gave the health service only a tiny budget increase, one that would instantly turn into a cut if inflation was higher than expected. In the summer, the actual spend on health was revealed to have fallen from £104.35 billion to £104.33 billion. Some mind-bending government spin ensued, but this was a broken promise, as was Cameron’s pre-election pledge to increase the number of midwives by 3,000.

The then Employment Minister Chris Grayling raised the issue of “benefit tourism” early in the year: “We’re increasing numbers of immigrants coming to these shores with a view to enjoying an easy life on benefits.” Errr…no. We found that the claimant rate among overseas nationals has fallen by two thirds in a decade. UKIP leader Nigel Farage warned about how easy it is for Eastern European migrants to get a council house in Britain. The truth is only 1% of people from the A8 nations, which include Poland and the Baltic States, were living in social housing the last time anyone checked.

The former immigration minister, Damian Green, claimed it’s possible “to come from anywhere in the world and on day one of arriving in Britain, live off benefits.” When we asked the DWP whether it’s possible to do this, we were told by a spokesman: “Anyone outside the EU or EEA cannot arrive in the UK and claim benefits from day one.” It’s the government’s aim to reduce net migration by the end of this parliament. It has fallen, but only to 183,000 on the latest figures, and largely because of a big drop in foreign students, something which could harm the economy.

The Tories are bringing in minimum pricing for alcohol, allegedly because of binge-drinking, but the average adult is drinking less than they used to; alcohol consumption is at its lowest since 1999. Binge drinking is down across all age groups and has fallen particularly sharply among 16-24-year-olds.

Source used:-
http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/2012-a-year-of-lying-shamelessly/12120

I could be wrong Ivan but can't "asylum seekers" claim from day 1 as they're not allowed to work?

We have an awful lot of seekers.

tlttf wrote:I could be wrong Ivan but can't "asylum seekers" claim from day 1 as they're not allowed to work?

We have an awful lot of seekers.

I think you will find tittf that if they come from one of the EU countries they can but if there from outside the EU there onto PLUMS, there is a way around that count it up and take it off what we have to pay the EU, the EU is not the only one that has an Incompetent gov't.

Don't think we get a lot of asylum seekers fronm the EU as it goes.
Stimulated by tlttf's comments I did go and look at the UNHCR website and read
1) The top ten countries of origin are as follows: Iran (2,477); Pakistan (2,418); Sri Lanka (1,756); Afghanistan (1,271); Eritrea (797), China (778); Nigeria (732); Libya (722); Sudan (688) and Bangladesh (616).
and also
2) The majority of asylum seekers do not have the right to work in the United Kingdom and so must rely on state support. Housing is provided, but asylum seekers cannot choose where it is, and it is often ‘hard to let’ properties which Council tenants do not want to live in. Cash support is available, and is currently set at £36.62 per person, per week, which makes it £5.23 a day for food, sanitation and clothing.

Have seen a programe on tv regarding people from India Pakistan and Bangladesh, living on the streets and begging the gov't to send them back but because they destroyed there papers for the moment they are stuck, and to feed themselves they are shop lifting and depending on charities soup vans.

Ivan, that's just genius. I've tweeted it.

bobby wrote:As I said some time ago, the same way the tories rid themselves of nationalised industry.
First they put in tame management, starve the company of funds by removing any subsidy, then sit back and watch the company flounder. The most cynical part of their plan is to then blame the workers for the failure before making redundancies then closing it down.

Bobby going back to the thread the answer to the question is a loud and resounding YES

Regrettably, there will still be Voters who like the smack of firm Government and we may all get the Government they deserve.

oftenwrong wrote:Regrettably, there will still be Voters who like the smack of firm Government and we may all get the Government they deserve.

I hope your not saying what I think your saying OW, another 5 years of a Tory gov't and the UK will be on its back DEAD

Maybe not dead, but very different - and not in a good way

The stark economic fact is that the Tory-led Coalition never had a chance of recovering from the 2008 Credit Crunch, which Alastair Darling at least MIGHT HAVE achieved if an impatient voting public had not declared "A plague on all your houses!"

Whoever claims victory in the next General Election will be obliged to sack even more Public-sector employees AND borrow an extra £Billion in the first year - just to keep from Bankruptcy.

I wouldn't wish that on an enemy, let alone the Labour Party.

Let UKIP f*** it up and then let's all get down to facing Reality by electing a truly POPULAR Government..

oftenwrong wrote:The stark economic fact is that the Tory-led Coalition never had a chance of recovering from the 2008 Credit Crunch, which Alastair Darling at least MIGHT HAVE achieved if an impatient voting public had not declared "A plague on all your houses!"

Whoever claims victory in the next General Election will be obliged to sack even more Public-sector employees AND borrow an extra £Billion in the first year - just to keep from Bankruptcy.

I wouldn't wish that on an enemy, let alone the Labour Party.

Let UKIP f*** it up and then let's all get down to facing Reality by electing a truly POPULAR Government..

One of the Tories' many Big Lies is that it's a straight choice between either cutting or borrowing - backed by their crowing mantra, 'You can't reduce your debts by borrowing more!'.

But it's bollocks. The other option is to tax more effectively, by introducing new taxes or, preferably, by enforcing the ones we already have effectively.

I've been privileged to spend the last couple of evenings in Parliament, hosted by some Labour MPs. One of them told me that avoided (i.e. legally dodged) tax represents some £16-20 bn - but evaded (ILlegally dodged) tax amounts to some £200 billion. Solve that, and not only is there no public spending deficit, but we're in a fiscal surplus.

If that enforcement is backed by some US-style draconian penalties for evasion, so much the better. One thing we could learn from the other side of the pond..

skwalker1964 wrote:

oftenwrong wrote:The stark economic fact is that the Tory-led Coalition never had a chance of recovering from the 2008 Credit Crunch, which Alastair Darling at least MIGHT HAVE achieved if an impatient voting public had not declared "A plague on all your houses!"

Whoever claims victory in the next General Election will be obliged to sack even more Public-sector employees AND borrow an extra £Billion in the first year - just to keep from Bankruptcy.

I wouldn't wish that on an enemy, let alone the Labour Party.

Let UKIP f*** it up and then let's all get down to facing Reality by electing a truly POPULAR Government..

One of the Tories' many Big Lies is that it's a straight choice between either cutting or borrowing - backed by their crowing mantra, 'You can't reduce your debts by borrowing more!'.

But it's bollocks. The other option is to tax more effectively, by introducing new taxes or, preferably, by enforcing the ones we already have effectively.

I've been privileged to spend the last couple of evenings in Parliament, hosted by some Labour MPs. One of them told me that avoided (i.e. legally dodged) tax represents some £16-20 bn - but evaded (ILlegally dodged) tax amounts to some £200 billion. Solve that, and not only is there no public spending deficit, but we're in a fiscal surplus.

If that enforcement is backed by some US-style draconian penalties for evasion, so much the better. One thing we could learn from the other side of the pond..

The Illegally dodged tax the majority of them will be Tory Donors, and what the Tories take off them in tax means less for them to pour into Tory party funds, I put something on twitter last night about Cameron being given tickets to raise money for the Arts & culture he did auction them money went straight into Tory party funds.

So, Steve, I wonder why there's never been the poitical will to tackle tax evasion - it's not by any means a new phenomenon, and surely it should be possible to give HMRC the resources for this - a saving in the long run